Join us at 9:30am on Sunday 11th November 2018 for our special observance of the Centenary of the end of the Great War 1914 – 1918.

We’ll be honouring some of the local residents who left these shores – including those who did not return. We’ll also be praying for genuine peace for our world. And we’ll hear words of hope and comfort from the Prince of Peace, the Lord Jesus.

And there will be a special morning tea after the service. (Church will finish by 10:30am and, for all who stay for morning tea, we will pause at 11:00am to remember the time the Armistice was signed.)

You could investigate incidental evidence – such as the cloud patterns on Earth visible on photos taken from lunar orbit, and from the surface. These aren’t central to the claims of lunar landings, they are quite incidental – yet they can be compared with weather maps and weather satellite images. This data hadn’t been examined until recently.

You could see if there are independent sources which corroborate the claims about Apollo. (e.g., Bochum Radio Observatory in West Germany, and several amateur radio operators claimed to receive and record S-band radio communications from the lunar surface).

Were there any hostile witnesses? (e.g. Did the Soviets think it actually happened? If not, did they expose the deception? Did they track the spacecraft?)

And do the claims about the lunar landings fit into what we know of the historical and political context of the time?

Once someone does that careful historical research, then debate about whether Apollo ‘happened’ or not moves from the realm of someone’s beliefto a question of history.

In the case of Apollo, the evidence is overwhelming. And yet, there are still some people who doggedly claim it is all a hoax.

Their refusal to acknowledge could be described as a religious belief – it’s a belief that has to ignore the evidence.

Even if someone wasn’t there to see it, or to be involved, to know that Apollo ‘happened’ does not require a ‘leap of faith’ – simply a willingness to check the available evidence with an open mind.

It’s a question of history.

Did the New Testament stories of Jesus really happen?

In just the same way, we can approach the claimed events of the birth, life, death and resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth.

One difference is, of course, that we are unable to speak with participants and eyewitnesses in the first century AD. They are long gone.

However, their testimony has been recorded, in the four Gospels, in the Book of Acts, and in some of the Letters – all in the New Testament. As well, there are very early records which support the claims of the Gospels.

So, we could (and should) use exactly the same kinds of historical tools as someone investigating Apollo.

While we cannot now interview anyone who was involved, we can read their written testimonies. Do their stories make sense, or do they contradict each other?

Were any of them eyewitnesses? Or are the best accounts you can find far removed from those involved?

Are they reliable and trustworthy witnesses?

What written evidence is there?

And what other records are there to help us evaluate the claims that Jesus of Nazareth was born, lived, taught, was killed, and rose from the dead?

Are there any artefacts to support the claims? – inscriptions, coins, ruins of buildings, etc.

Is there other evidence?

We could investigate incidental evidence – such as the names of places and people mentioned in the accounts. Are they real places and real people? Are they accurately described? Are the names of people consistent with what we know from other sources? (See some fascinating recent research in this lecture given in Houston in 2011).

We could see if there are independent sources which corroborate the claims about Jesus. (e.g. the historians Josephus and Tacitus).

Were there any hostile witnesses? (e.g. Religious authorities in Jerusalem – people who rejected claims about Jesus, yet whose comments, nevertheless, give us some information about him.)

And do the claims about Jesus fit into what we know of the historical and political context of the time?

Once someone does that careful historical research, then debate about whether Jesus lived, taught, died, and rose from death, moves from the realm of someone’s belief to a question of history.

In the Bible, ‘faith’ is never ‘believing something you know isn’t true’ or ‘believing something despite the evidence’.

No, ‘faith’ (an equivalent English word is ‘trust’) is based on facts, not feelings, not hopes.

Because this is the case, the Bible’s claims about Jesus invite enquiry. Do they stand up to careful scrutiny? Many, many historians believe they do.

If you haven’t seriously investigated these things, may I encourage you, and urge you, to do that.

Why it matters

Does it matter what anyone thinks about Jesus?

If the claims about Jesus do not stand up to the kind of scrutiny I’ve outlined above, then the claim that he is God who has come to save people should be rejected.

However, if it is true, then the implications are massive.

You see, the Bible outlines humankind’s great problem – we are separated from the loving God who made us. We’re separated because we’ve lived our lives our way – rejecting his rightful place in our lives. And that leaves us in a very dangerous position.

Yet, because of his amazing love for us, he sent Jesus to rescue men and women from the consequences of living for themselves.

If someone were to put their trust in Jesus, there is forgiveness, and a new start. And that is really the best news there is!

There are many good and helpful books which approach the question of the historicity of the New Testament accounts honestly, but I recommend Dr. Paul Barnett’s books because I’ve read them, and he is a very careful and knowledgeable researcher.